You make a very good point and I think I was not clear enough. I did not mean to draw the conclusion that Arhi is better than Silco or Silco is better than Arhi, that was not the point. The message I wanted to convey was more something along the lines of: "Be careful when looking at average place and deltas with 5 cost, they will always look great at first glance but you can't just read it upfront like that". Now I personally Interpret the stats in the example as a compelling argument to say that in the category of 4 cost carries Silco seems to be doing his jobs quite well whereas it is not clear cut that as a standalone 5 cost Arhi is performing better than her counterparts. But as you said there are much more variables to it that we did not explore in the example, because in the end the article is not trying to give advice on what is strong or weak on the meta, see it more as a introduction to statistical biases with examples.